Fake News Media Attack Candace Owens Over Hitler and Nationalism Comments
Related:
Food for thought from a friend of mine regarding the Holocaust...
All I can say is this takes a bit of research – just like with 911. It’s a case of looking into the facts as opposed to assuming the official story. A number of key points can be covered fairly quickly. Then there is the ‘problem’ of addressing the ‘rebuttals’ against, and also addressing people’s lack of knowledge about general living conditions and political conditions at the end of WW2. People are not historians, often not even at the most basic level. When seen in context the questions raised by the revisionists make sense. Some of the revisionists tho, a very small fringe perhaps?, are very pro Nazi and maintain that Hitler did nothing wrong. I don’t really agree with that position either.
Anyway, at first I had no reason to doubt anything about the Holocaust. I only slowly came torealize there were problems on many many levels with the official story after a lot of research. My first exposure to doubting what happened came from material linked at Whatreallyhappened.com Also the MSM censorship on debate after the early 90s, and the threatening tactics vs deniers, was a red flag too.
As usual, being somewhat curious, I did take a look, and then realized there was a lot of officially admitted revisionism of what had happened. There were no human skin lamp shades, shrunken heads (this showed a level of fabricated narrative), and the numbers of dead at Auschwitz had been progressively revised down while the official dead (Jews) still remained at 6 million. The excuse is that the deaths occurred elsewhere. The problem is that the 6 million figure was repeatedly printed in newspapers in the decades before WW2, and it is a kind of ‘holy’ number. We also have Jewish census numbers from before and after WW2 that shows no 6 million drop, and there is also no additional information to explain where the missing deaths outside of Auschwitz came from?
The best I can do with this issue is provide links to material that best explains the fundamental problems we have with the official story. (there is no way I will be let into Germany if I wanted to go there!) One thing that won’t appear much in these videos is mention of the dead civilians in Europe that died of starvation. I know that an estimated 20,000 people died of starvation in Holland at the end of the war. In Germany, with infrastructure systems in ruins, they suffered similarly. In the last months of the war the slave labour concentration camps were not properly feeding their prisoners. You can image what happened, along with the fact that the camps suffered incidents of disease (and where the camp commandants were fired?/reprimanded for neglecting hygiene – this came out in official documents recently released – although the incidents of disease occurred throughout the war).
Anyway these are the videos that I think are most relevant.
The first is a short summary clip (ignore the dramatic music) that highlights officially admitted revisions to the narrative, and includes a few other points of informed criticism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
Anyway these are the videos that I think are most relevant.
The first is a short summary clip (ignore the dramatic music) that highlights officially admitted revisions to the narrative, and includes a few other points of informed criticism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
The next video is the ‘famous’ clip from David Cole (a Jew) visiting Auschwitz:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
This next clip is a huge multi hour analysis of official accounts and analysis of the actual camps themselves by Denierbud.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
These are good things for starters, that deal with the core arguments. The problem I’ve noticed is that the rebuttals to this material are wishy washy. Like debunker 911 arguments. For instance during the court case against historian David Irving (regardless of what you think of the man), a pro denier argument was put that the Prussian Blue staining we should see inside the claimed genocidal gas chamber is not there. The rebuttal expert said that it would have flaked off, and only penetrated a tiny bit into the walls. This excuse was left standing and not challenged (Irving screwed up his court case). This excuse is obviously false because the delousing rooms that did use the Zyklon B gas has staining that permeated the walls, and as other experts pointed out, traveled into the walls with water moisture. The alleged gas chambers themselves only have very small trace amounts of the gas, and no staining, that one would expect from the general environment. The actual gas chamber there looks to be a remodelled air raid shelter too. Other stories about mass execution involved electrified rooms and diesel asphyxiation, all of which have been walked back.
The few “debates” with Shermer on this subject show a poor (non-existent) defense of the official story. You can look them up if you want, but his arguments are poor generalized dismissals rather than addressing specific points of evidence (unlike some of the recent ‘debunking’ attempts.)
As usual, I will change my mind on this matter if the evidence warrants it. The explanations would need to be extraordinary to account for the circus of misinformation and (actual) lies that have been documented when it comes to this subject. I would like to believe the official story, but rationally I cannot.
That’s it.
As usual, I will change my mind on this matter if the evidence warrants it. The explanations would need to be extraordinary to account for the circus of misinformation and (actual) lies that have been documented when it comes to this subject. I would like to believe the official story, but rationally I cannot.
That’s it.
Ps. In looking up these links I just watched a debunking video from Miles Power, who also has a 911 debunking vid (I didn’t watch) and found that he was responding to non-issues (what does final solution actually mean for the Nazis? – it doesn’t necessarily mean extermination, but it can equally mean internment and deportation, since they saw ‘organised Jewry’ as a national security threat, but Power says this document term is coded meaning for extermination). The debunking vid didn’t properly address the Prussian blue staining and made a stupid argument about it (- there were high concentrations of the gas in the delousing areas, as opposed to the lower amounts used in the gas chamber – yet they were gassing their victims 24/7 and we see no real signs of the staining. He says researchers later detected cyanide in the gas chamber areas but he does not say whether these were the trace amounts consistent with the normal environment of the camp) and he also misleads the audience by saying that the poison doesn’t permeate the walls (false), that goes against common sense. An issue that I do have, that is partly unresolved, is WHEN the air-raid shelter/gas chamber was reconditioned (I don’t know if I believe his account). Further, he doesn’t fully address the issue of airing the gas out of the chambers so close to other buildings occupied by the Nazi administrators. The aerial pics of the chimney he seems to get right, that it existed during the war, but this leaves open the issue of the missing aerial photos showing 24/7 smoke and burning which should be seen in one or two pics, and the fuel for these fires? This does not exist. Oh, the debunking video’s denier, that gets ‘picked apart’ doesn’t make the best arguments (ie the non-air tight doors, that are replacement doors and not ones from the 40s), and makes wrongful arguments (lies) about the Nazis in general and attacking Poland. A bit like having someone from 911 truth base the centre of their argument on the idea that no plane hit the Pentagon. End of thoughts.
Pps. Just to reiterate. I’m not interested in how many quacks and Nazi apologists are into this topic. I’m only interested in the verifiable (scientific) facts and what is true here. It’s about what I can and cannot prove. What issues are set in concrete, or what contradictory hard evidence exists that refutes the official story.
I suggest everyone interested go on a long journey of discovery if you are interested. With enough starting information you can then critically look at the supposed debunking. If you are not interested then don’t worry. Other people, with expertise in the arguments and evidence can duke it out, and if you follow from the sidelines you can see how things go. Or just ignore it. I found the issue interesting and relevant in terms of WW2 and post WW2 propaganda (how it was used to send the Germans on a guilt trip, and stop people from trying to later glorify or justify the war. There were good reasons for the allies to push this material).
Also see...
Thoughts on Dinesh D'Souza's Film Death of a Nation...I suggest everyone interested go on a long journey of discovery if you are interested. With enough starting information you can then critically look at the supposed debunking. If you are not interested then don’t worry. Other people, with expertise in the arguments and evidence can duke it out, and if you follow from the sidelines you can see how things go. Or just ignore it. I found the issue interesting and relevant in terms of WW2 and post WW2 propaganda (how it was used to send the Germans on a guilt trip, and stop people from trying to later glorify or justify the war. There were good reasons for the allies to push this material).
Also see...
https://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2018/08/thoughts-on-dinesh-dsouza-film-death-of.html
